1. In representing your client HG (the “Client”), you engaged in the following conduct:
(a) you continued to forward on the Client’s behalf, from December 2007 onward, monthly money orders to CIBC Mortgage Inc. as purported payments on a mortgage at [address], Coquitlam, BC (the “Mortgage”) when the Mortgage had been discharged by order of the Supreme Court of British Columbia on or about November 26, 2007 (the “Order”);
(b) you persisted in the conduct referred to above despite such conduct being prejudicial to both the Client and to CIBC, and in the face of numerous requests by CIBC that you cease and desist;
(c) you stated in your letter to CIBC dated September 29, 2008, that the Client would “continue to service his mortgage with CIBC, until CIBC finally shows a true copy of a mortgage payout and showing that my client is no longer liable for his mortgage, which to date CIBC has failed to do” when CIBC had provided you with a copy of the discharge statement in respect of the Mortgage in its letters dated February 25, 2008 and April 14, 2008; and
(d) in your letter to CIBC dated September 29, 2008, written in the course of your representation of the Client, you stated in respect of the Mortgage and the Order, without any reasonable basis for so doing, that the lawyer representing the Client’s spouse (KO) was attempting “to get CIBC to go along with” a “massive theft of equity in the fraudulent transfer of property transaction” and by insinuating, among other things, that KO’s alleged activities were an example of “white collar crime”.
2. You failed to provide a substantive response to the questions posed to you in the Law Society’s letters dated January 23, 2009, February 26, 2009, March 4, 2009, and March 17, 2009.
